Both media outlets are significant sources of information for Chinese people seeking alternative viewpoints to counter communist propaganda.
As U.S.–China tensions rise and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) increasingly shows hostility toward the West, the United States will need VOA and RFA’s unique window into China—but not without change.
I still remember how we relied on VOA broadcasting during the 1989 student-led pro-democracy movement. I was in college at the time. Most of China was misled by the CCP’s propaganda, which claimed that not a single student was killed on Tiananmen Square and that so-called bad people who collaborated with foreign anti-Beijing forces were responsible for the deaths of Chinese soldiers. However, those of us who listened to VOA knew that the reality was completely different.
After the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, RFA was established under the International Broadcasting Act of 1994 to make facts available to Asian countries that had limited access to unrestricted media.
To Chinese listeners at the time, VOA represented the beacon of hope and freedom that the United States was all about, and RFA was pro-democracy and anti-CCP. But that’s no longer the case.
Over the years, CCP narratives have seeped into the organizations’ messages; VOA and RFA have hired many journalists from China.
My good friend Tang Baiqiao—a well-known political dissident and former student leader in the 1989 pro-democracy movement—used to be a regular contributor to VOA. However, about a decade ago, he discovered that he had been placed on a blacklist by a new manager, who was previously a reporter for the state-run Xinhua News Agency. This manager’s father was the chief correspondent for the People’s Daily in the United States during the 1980s and 1990s. As a result of this blacklist, Tang has been excluded from all programs, including one featuring Peter Navarro’s 2011 book “Death by China,” for which he wrote the foreword.
More and more faces from mainland China have shown up at VOA and RFA. Statutorily, the organizations cannot disqualify job candidates on the basis of affiliation with the CCP. Hence, top talent from China’s outlets such as Xinhua News Agency and Chinese Central Television (CCTV) easily outperform others in the hiring process.
Consequently, the tones of VOA and RFA have become subtly more favorable to the CCP. Tang has described it as “minor criticism lending a big help.” That is a media category in the CCP’s united front strategy; sometimes, those who appear to be critical of the CCP have more influence and can be used sporadically to assist with critical communist narratives.
Such Chinese individuals have also infiltrated the management of VOA and RFA. Together with managers who have a background in left-leaning mainstream media, they can no longer be trusted to expose the CCP’s evildoings.
Such is the sad reality for their loyal Chinese audience.
One of the whistleblowers with a journalism background immediately turned pale and fled the room. He knew that overseas journalists from Chinese media agencies were spies.
Many seasoned liberal media journalists end up working at the VOA’s Central News Office, managing the editorial guidelines.
Now, amid rising tensions between the United States and the CCP, the United States must maintain a Chinese-language news platform that represents American values.
In particular, VOA, with its legacy of more than 80 years, has served as a vital soft power asset for the United States.
Therefore, I am cautiously optimistic that VOA and RFA can survive by refocusing on their original missions.
